More Boosters

I'm going to take a guess and it stands for Remote Manuevering System; something to remotely control the resuplly probe from Columbia as there would be too much latency from the ground. Might be completely wrong.

Kerbals have actually landed some of their kind to Duna and beyond, so yeah

Yes, move Minmus to a dunar orbit and give Mun an inclination.

I think he is an actual biologist in real life though.

I would move Minmus to Duna's orbit. Don't like the idea of an easier target than Mun within Kerbin's SoI, making the Mun a one time visit.

I recall someone mentioning that larger vehicles are inherently more efficient though I can't say I am sure why exactly. Maybe it's that aerodynamic losses make up a greater fraction of the overall losses? Not sure, but something like the SLS is a good starting point in my opinion. I mean, we intend to eventually get something larger than a probe out there, and the SLS is a class of its own. They probably shouldn't and won't use it to place satellites one by one, maybe in bulk.

I believe Near Future Propulsion does have larger Xenon tanks.

That difference is surprisingly little. I'll certainly consider that for very-low TWR vehicles as I'm sure I'd lose more to steering than a measly 20 Delta-V at a 70km orbit compared to a 300km orbit. Thanks for this! Edit: Of course this doesn't include the Delta-V cost of getting to a 300x300 orbit as opposed to a 70x70 one, but how much would that cost anyway? 400? 500? Either way, makes rendezvous and refueling all that much easier.

What is the purpose in field refueling? Gee I wonder.

How about some more exotic stuff? 1. A LANTR engine in the Mk2 form factor, basically that nuke engine from Atomic Age that is lighter, less efficient and can punch in LOX for a reduced ISP but reduced LF consumption rate and higher thrust. 2. A gas-core closed-cycle nuclear thermal rocket, basically a nuclear lightbulb. 3. Nuclear ramjet for high performance at non-oxygenated atmospheres. I'm not sure how you would balance it but if you can balance a nuclear lightbulb this shouldn't be too hard either. 4. Air-augmented rocket engines, which draw air for higher ISP

So you want to radially boost one side of the orbit enough so that the other half of the orbit crosses the atmosphere, okay that makes sense.

I know what you are talking about, but wouldn't the thrust be generated on the side the laser hits? Which will have to be the Earth-facing side, naturally, sending the piece of debris away instead of closer to Earth.

How would reducing mass help if your fuel's mass is lowered too? Your mass fraction and hence Delta-V would be the same.

How are you going to get that? You'd have to shoot the laser from above the debris.

FOOF. What sounds like a companion for Winnie the Pooh is a ridiculously powerful oxidant that can set fire to water, sand, anything you thought couldn't burn and/or melt away. Unlike Chlorine Triflouride, which can also set fire to the sand and actually has done it in an industrial accident, nobody wants to get anywhere near FOOF or try to use it anywhere. I blame Command & Conquer Generals.

Here you go.

Don't want to be an asshat but cryo engines need at least like 430 ISP to work properly. How much better is slightly better? Anyway, 360 sounds good enough for this engine, I didn't download the new version but it's quite a way off on my career anyway.

For very large craft the crew pods add 1-4 tons over an unmanned craft which is rather negligible (in that case). Though I'll admit the mass on the 3 Kerbal command pod is utterly ridiculous.

The nest update will have an ISRU focus, with ore storage, mining and processing parts, along with things like LF/O VTOL engines for mining ops on airless worlds. As for the hubs, the current textures do stand out; reworking them wouldn't be too hard. This keeps getting better and better! I had no idea the Mk2 form factor had so much potential. Though I couldn't find the conformal solar panels on the utility section, wasn't the last release supposed to add them?

How is the nuclear turboramjet and that NSWR coming along?

I'm not sure if planned obsolescence is as big of a deal as people seem to think. My iPhone 4 has shrugged off multiple drops (including one from a moving bus with its door open, I dropped it and it slid on the floor onto the street) and it still works with no discernible defect. But those charging cables are indeed overpriced and they don't last long so there's a problem there.

I see. Well, you already have the EnrichedUranium-using nuclear reactor, so Alcubierre Drive and Hydrolox engines aren't going to break anything here in the sense that there are already non-stock mechanics added. Did you consider a Mk2 ISRU at some point? Edit: Would you consider making the textures on the junction adapters more stockalike? They feel rather out of place. Being able to fill them with fuel would be great as well.

Hey! Stock vehicles are outdated, they are bad, they should feel bad, and they don't tell a newcomer anything about how to design a proper rocket. Therefore I am suggesting a contest of some sort to determine a new set of stock craft for KSP, with streamlined easy to use and effective vehicles for various roles.

This kind of stuff is usually meant for mods, Squad seems to be trying to keep things as simple as possible.

You can easily not use the Klaw for this, it's a single player game after all. And you're thinking of Kerbal Inventory System/Kerbal Attachment System